Modern scientific facts that the Buddha knew?

Arthurbodhi · April 2012

Hi friend, I ask this mostly motivated by curiosity but do you know some modern scientific facts that the Buddha seems already to knew 2500 years before?

Maybe is can be just coincident and I already know that isn't important for the path to liberation of suffering, but is interesting.

For example Buddha and earthquakes:

"Detection of ionospheric perturbations associated with earthquake using data of IAP and ISL instruments of DEMETER satellite"
http://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/8/135/2008/nhess-8-135-2008.html

With this:

"When mighty atmospheric disturbances take place, the liquid is agitated. With the agitation of the liquid, tremors of the Earth arise. This is the first reason, the first cause for the arising of mighty earthquakes."
DN 16: Maha-parinibbana Sutta

Blessings.

caz · April 2012

I don't really mind about those. Its the teachings on Liberation from suffering and its causes that are his greatest treasure.

federica · April 2012

I second that.
it doesn't have any relevance.
the most important and relevant thing you need to know the Buddha spoke was, to paraphrase, "I come to teach the origin of stress and the cessation of stress."
everything else is just 'sprinklin's....'

David · April 2012

All very true, but it's fun at the same time... I've found that fun (mindful fun) helps greatly with the cessation of stress.

I think Buddha would want us to look deeply into all aspects even if only to be liberated from them.

A beginners mind is a wonder-full mind.

Cinorjer · April 2012

It's fascinating to look at the worldview or cosmology of people back before even the telescope was invented and all they had was observation of their immediate world.

The entire chapter of that Sutta is Buddha giving Eight causes for an earthquate, right after he caused one to happen by announcing his intention to die soon. Seven of them are because beings of great power are doing something that affects the world itself, such as an enlightened person dying, or of a great Sage or a god concentrating very intensely. I won't comment more on that.

The one natural cause he mentions includes the belief that the land was a huge floating island on a vast sea of water, and that it was the wind agitating the water that causes the earth to trimble. It does show some great observation. Water comes from underground via wells, so there must be a vast lake under our feet. Since earthquakes are often accompanied by agitation in the surrounding lakes and ocean, including huge waves sweeping ashore, it's connected somehow. They knew the wind causes waves. Therefore wind causes waves that agitate the vast underground lakes and cause earthquakes.

They just got the wave and earthquake connection backward. Also, they obviously had no knowledge of techtonics or that huge chunks of land were slowly moving against each other.

ThailandTom · April 2012

@Cinorjer I looked into Buddhist cosmology not long ago as I had previously not come across too much about it. One thing I came across from what I read is that the realms of existences such as the devas etc are actual physical planes that are measured in human lengths above the earth.

Zero · April 2012

Modern scientific expression is generally via metaphors and similies... the core is usually mathematical proof which is too abstract for the wider population - as such many descriptions will sound similar... this is common in say quantum mechanics where simple illustrative examples seem to refer to unrelated philosophies.

Another way perhaps, there is a collective of information out there about the sophistication of past societies - it is not inconceivable that some ancient knowledge was far more advanced than mainstream historians claim.

Jason · April 2012

I'd say none since the Buddha wasn't a modern-day scientist with mordern-day scientific equipment. That said, it's actually not that far off from current models (e.g., the asthenosphere is highly viscous and the upper, more solid lithosphere essentially 'floats' on the flowing layer below due to the movement of convection currents or even ionospheric perturbations). But I don't really put too much stock in 2,500 year old cosmology, and I personally think this passage may be part of a later addition that attempted to elucidate the super-human qualities of the Buddha. For example, from The Mission Accomplished by Ven. Pategama Gnanarama:

Naturally, when taken as a whole, it depicts a period of evolution of early Buddhist thought. By discerning the trends of early Buddhist thought subjected to evolution, one can recognise the different strata in the Sutta; for just a few years after the decease of the Blessed One, many docetic elements have been attributed to His human personality. The Sutta [i.e., DN 16], in accordance with the old Theravada point of view, still preserves some factual statements which dealt with the human personality of the Buddha, side by side with the docetism attributed to him. Hence the self-contradictory nature of some of the statements have to be viewed from different angles and when they ent angles and when they are analysed and the docetic elements segregated, the Buddha is seen as a man of wisdom and strength.

In the discussions on the lesser and minor offences, the conditions of welfare meant for the monks, the four great authorities, the life span of the Buddha, the probable date of the Great Decease, the verses of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the suttas extended on the themes found in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta etc. we found that the structural constituents of the Sutta belonged to different stages of evolution. The multiplicity of the subjects discussed in the Sutta is a clear indication to its later compilation which invariably challenges its authenticity. Supernatural phenomena intermingled with the flow of gentle as well as realistic occurrences found in the Sutta cannot be taken as historical truth. It is more plausible to regard place names such as Gotamatitth and Gotamadvàra found in the Sutta as names introduced after the demise of the Buddha. Undoubtedly, the list of the causes of earthquakes can be easily set aside as late material interpolated in elucidation of the super-human qualities of the Buddha.

The eight causes of earthquakes naturally depict how the redactors of the Sutta turned apologetic in regard to giving up of the term of life in order to attain Parinibbana by the Buddha.

The causes of earthquakes said to have been explained by the Buddha to Ananda are;

1. The great earth is established on water the water on wind and wind rests upon space. As the mighty wind blows, the waters are shaken and by the moving waters, the earth shaken.
2. A recluse, a brahmana, a god or a fairy of great power can make the earth move and tremble and shake violently.
3. When the Bodhisatta deliberately leaving the heavenly world descends into the mother’s womb, then the earth quakes and trembles.
4. When the Bodhisatta deliberately quits his mother’s womb then the earth quakes and trembles.
5. When a Tathagata arrives at the supreme enlightenment then the earth quakes and trembles.
6. When a Tathagata delivers his first sermon then the earth quakes and trembles.
7. When a Tathagata consciously rejects the remainder of His life term and then the earth quakes and trembles.
8. When a Tathagata passes entirely away in that utter passing away in which nothing whatever is left behind then the earth quakes and trembles.

These eight causes of earthquakes are totally absent in the Tibetan version of our text. Rhys Davids, too, observed that these passages dealing with earthquakes are ‘quite out
of place.’

ThailandTom · April 2012

I have posted this link before somewhere, but if anyone is curious about what wiki says about Buddhist cosmology take a read. It is interesting to say the least.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology

person · April 2012

There's the agganna sutta where the Buddha describes the origins of life. Its not really a description of evolution in that it doesn't describe natural selection or genetics or anything but it does describe life as originating in simpler forms and changing over time to more complex ones. Take it for what its worth.

Jason · April 2012

There's the agganna sutta where the Buddha describes the origins of life. Its not really a description of evolution in that it doesn't describe natural selection or genetics or anything but it does describe life as originating in simpler forms and changing over time to more complex ones. Take it for what its worth.

Yes, there does appears to be a type of creation myth in the Agganna Sutta of the Digha Nikaya, where the Buddha tells a story about the beginning of life on this world to two brahmins which, in the end, was used to illustrate how the way to liberation is beyond caste and lineage. So, in this regard, the Buddha does give what can be interpreted as a rough theory of evolution to the pair of brahmins in that the physical characteristics of the mythological beings in question change due to environmental changes and interactions, as well as a description the universe somewhat akin to the oscillating universe theory. Thus, when taken literally, the creation myth in DN 27 can be seen as an attempt to give a naturalistic explanation of the origins of life and the universe.

That being said, I agree with Prof. Gombrich that, taking the context of DN 27 into account, this sutta is a lively and ingenious parody that's actually meant to make fun of the very need for a cosmology as a foundation for religious development (How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings, pg. 81-82). In fact, considering the context, 'the world' being talked about may not be the universe at all. Since the Buddha uses the word loko or 'world,' which is often used as a metaphor for the six sense spheres, 'the world' being referenced is most likely not the universe but the world of sensory experience, which certainly agrees with the Buddha's pragmatic and often witty teaching style.

DaltheJigsaw · April 2012

Great thread!

Sabre · April 2012

Science isn't about facts, it's about doing the right guesses.

Science 101 for who didn't know:

Arthurbodhi · April 2012

Like @ourself said I already know that this is not very relevant but is kind of fun.

Anyways thanks for all your answers, friends.

Blessings

vinlyn · April 2012

I'd say none since the Buddha wasn't a modern-day scientist with mordern-day scientific equipment. That said, it's actually not that far off from current models (e.g., the asthenosphere is highly viscous and the upper, more solid lithosphere essentially 'floats' on the flowing layer below due to the movement of convection currents or even ionospheric perturbations). But I don't really put too much stock in 2,500 year old cosmology, and I personally think this passage may be part of a later addition that attempted to elucidate the super-human qualities of the Buddha. For example, from The Mission Accomplished by Ven. Pategama Gnanarama:
Naturally, when taken as a whole, it depicts a period of evolution of early Buddhist thought. By discerning the trends of early Buddhist thought subjected to evolution, one can recognise the different strata in the Sutta; for just a few years after the decease of the Blessed One, many docetic elements have been attributed to His human personality. The Sutta [i.e., DN 16], in accordance with the old Theravada point of view, still preserves some factual statements which dealt with the human personality of the Buddha, side by side with the docetism attributed to him. Hence the self-contradictory nature of some of the statements have to be viewed from different angles and when they ent angles and when they are analysed and the docetic elements segregated, the Buddha is seen as a man of wisdom and strength.

In the discussions on the lesser and minor offences, the conditions of welfare meant for the monks, the four great authorities, the life span of the Buddha, the probable date of the Great Decease, the verses of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the suttas extended on the themes found in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta etc. we found that the structural constituents of the Sutta belonged to different stages of evolution. The multiplicity of the subjects discussed in the Sutta is a clear indication to its later compilation which invariably challenges its authenticity. Supernatural phenomena intermingled with the flow of gentle as well as realistic occurrences found in the Sutta cannot be taken as historical truth. It is more plausible to regard place names such as Gotamatitth and Gotamadvàra found in the Sutta as names introduced after the demise of the Buddha. Undoubtedly, the list of the causes of earthquakes can be easily set aside as late material interpolated in elucidation of the super-human qualities of the Buddha.

The eight causes of earthquakes naturally depict how the redactors of the Sutta turned apologetic in regard to giving up of the term of life in order to attain Parinibbana by the Buddha.

The causes of earthquakes said to have been explained by the Buddha to Ananda are;

1. The great earth is established on water the water on wind and wind rests upon space. As the mighty wind blows, the waters are shaken and by the moving waters, the earth shaken.
2. A recluse, a brahmana, a god or a fairy of great power can make the earth move and tremble and shake violently.
3. When the Bodhisatta deliberately leaving the heavenly world descends into the mother’s womb, then the earth quakes and trembles.
4. When the Bodhisatta deliberately quits his mother’s womb then the earth quakes and trembles.
5. When a Tathagata arrives at the supreme enlightenment then the earth quakes and trembles.
6. When a Tathagata delivers his first sermon then the earth quakes and trembles.
7. When a Tathagata consciously rejects the remainder of His life term and then the earth quakes and trembles.
8. When a Tathagata passes entirely away in that utter passing away in which nothing whatever is left behind then the earth quakes and trembles.

These eight causes of earthquakes are totally absent in the Tibetan version of our text. Rhys Davids, too, observed that these passages dealing with earthquakes are ‘quite out
of place.’

This bothers me, so I guess I have to ask some tough questions here.

1. Are you saying that the Theravadan Pali texts are less authentic than the Tibetan texts?

2. Are you saying that we cannot trust the texts to be the teachings of Buddha?

3. Are you saying that in some teachings Buddha was wrong?

4. Are you suggesting that one cherry picks what in the texts to believe?

Jeffrey · April 2012

Here's how I understand the scientific method

1 Define a problem
2 Make observations
3 Gather data
4 Make a hypothesis to explain the observations and data
5 Test the hypothesis with experiments designed to test
6 If there is an observed physical relationship that is always observed that Becomes a Scientific Law

I think 1, 2, 3 are the first noble truth. I think 4 is the second noble truth. I think 5 is the third noble truth testing the ending of craving and ignorance and seeing if that brings a relief. Finally 6 is the fourth noble truth when you find a path which is like a Law.

But in some ways there are differences between measurements of chemical composition and so forth is not too similar to meditative experiments. But still it makes sense.

Jason · April 2012

This bothers me, so I guess I have to ask some tough questions here.

1. Are you saying that the Theravadan Pali texts are less authentic than the Tibetan texts?

2. Are you saying that we cannot trust the texts to be the teachings of Buddha?

3. Are you saying that in some teachings Buddha was wrong?

4. Are you suggesting that one cherry picks what in the texts to believe?

They're not so much tough as they are unnecessarily inflammatory and accusative, in my opinion. Maybe all I'm saying is that it doesn't hurt to take the time to study the suttas and think about them critically, looking at the texts from all sides and making an informed decision about what to accept and what to be skeptical of.

vinlyn · April 2012

This bothers me, so I guess I have to ask some tough questions here.

1. Are you saying that the Theravadan Pali texts are less authentic than the Tibetan texts?

2. Are you saying that we cannot trust the texts to be the teachings of Buddha?

3. Are you saying that in some teachings Buddha was wrong?

4. Are you suggesting that one cherry picks what in the texts to believe?

They're not so much tough as they are unnecessarily inflammatory and accusative, in my opinion. Maybe all I'm saying is that it doesn't hurt to take the time to study the suttas and think about them critically, looking at the texts from all sides and making an informed decision about what to accept and what to be skeptical of.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory at all.

What you posted brings into question the accuracy of the Theravadan texts. I don't have a problem with questioning such things, and, in fact, I have always questioned whether it is accurate to say that the Buddhist texts are the exact words of Buddha. After all, they weren't written during Buddha's lifetime and the words were passed down for dozens of years, if not more than 100 years. But since you posted that excerpt of a writing, I'm trying to see if you believe that the Theravadan texts are less accurate than the Tibetan texts. The two texts are clearly not the same, so what's inflammatory about asking which is more authentic?

And cherry picking is so often criticized in this forum, I'd like to know how questioning certain parts of the Theravadan texts as being unauthentic is not pretty much the same as cherry picking. But make no mistake...I cherry pick.

seeker242 · April 2012

I found this interesting

"Did the Buddha correctly estimate the size of an atom?"

http://www.tricycle.com/p/2401

Arthurbodhi · April 2012

In a site that have a "Dictionary of Science Quotations " have 2 from the Buddha:

"All things appear and disappear because of the concurrence of causes and conditions. Nothing ever exists entirely alone; everything is in relationship to everything else. "

And

"As a net is made up of a series of ties, so everything in this world is connected by a series of ties. If anyone thinks that the mesh of a net is an independent, isolated thing, he is mistaken. It is called a net because it is made up of a series of a interconnected meshes, and each mesh has its place and responsibility in relation to other meshes. "

http://www.todayinsci.com/B/Buddha/Buddha-Quotations.htm

The Buddha dont use the scientific method so if he knew all that stuff is not from science, but I can't deny that this facts are fully compatible with modern science.

Jason · April 2012

I'm not trying to be inflammatory at all.

What you posted brings into question the accuracy of the Theravadan texts. I don't have a problem with questioning such things, and, in fact, I have always questioned whether it is accurate to say that the Buddhist texts are the exact words of Buddha. After all, they weren't written during Buddha's lifetime and the words were passed down for dozens of years, if not more than 100 years. But since you posted that excerpt of a writing, I'm trying to see if you believe that the Theravadan texts are less accurate than the Tibetan texts. The two texts are clearly not the same, so what's inflammatory about asking which is more authentic?

And cherry picking is so often criticized in this forum, I'd like to know how questioning certain parts of the Theravadan texts as being unauthentic is not pretty much the same as cherry picking. But make no mistake...I cherry pick.

Yes, I'm sure there are some mistakes and/or later additions to the teachings and texts after 2,500 years. That's probably inevitable. But the rest of what you wrote doesn't necessarily follow. Pointing out one questionable passage in thousands upon thousands doesn't mean that I'm saying Theravadin texts are less authentic than Tibetan texts; that we cannot trust the texts to be the teachings of Buddha; that in some teachings Buddha was wrong; or that one cherry picks what in the texts to believe. What I am suggesting, however, is that it doesn't hurt to take the time to study the suttas (or any body of literature, for that matter) and think about them critically, looking at the texts from all sides and making an informed decision about what to accept and what to be skeptical of.

vinlyn · April 2012

^ Cool. Thank you for clarifying.

Arthurbodhi · April 2012

I found this interesting

"Did the Buddha correctly estimate the size of an atom?"

http://www.tricycle.com/p/2401

Wow! Do you read the comments? According to one, The Buddha knew about computer controlled space ships for interplanetar travel!! :O

Victorious · April 2012

1. Annicca - Everything has a beginning a middle and an end predicts the same thing about perpetual machines as the first and second laws of thermodynamics.

2. Dukkha All things are tainted with suffering. Order is happiness and disorder is Dukkha. Therefore Dukkha corrolates with the Second law of theromodynamics.

/Victor

Victorious · April 2012

In Vissuddhi magga there is a passage explaining several ways for someone to fly.

1. being born with wings
2. developing supernatural powers
3. Through Science!!!

No telling what the source of that is.

In the same book there was a passage of how you through science could make pictures appear in the empty air.

/Victor

Jeffrey · April 2012

@Victorious why do you think disorder is unhappiness? And order happiness?

The arrow of time is going towards disorder... So how could that happen if beings are becoming enlightened?

The third law of thermodynamics is to define a crystal at zero Kelvin as the zero energy point. That law is actually needed to understand science of matter at some scales.

So that would be the least disorder. Is a Buddha a crystal at zero Kelvin? I think that absurdity shows that it's a loose correlation to say Buddha knew about the laws of thermodynamics. And this is from someone who reads messages in his cereal.

:mullet:

Anyways, good to see you Victorious, I am just being a retard to socialize as I am stressed.

Victorious · April 2012

@Victorious why do you think disorder is unhappiness? And order happiness?

The arrow of time is going towards disorder... So how could that happen if beings are becoming enlightened?

The third law of thermodynamics is to define a crystal at zero Kelvin as the zero energy point. That law is actually needed to understand science of matter at some scales.

So that would be the least disorder. Is a Buddha a crystal at zero Kelvin? I think that absurdity shows that it's a loose correlation to say Buddha knew about the laws of thermodynamics. And this is from someone who reads messages in his cereal.

:mullet:

Anyways, good to see you Victorious, I am just being a retard to socialize as I am stressed.

Hi @Jeffrey Hope all is well!

Order is happiness because when we find solace in a thing (when we cling) we do not want that to change. To keep a thing at equlibrium always requires input of external energy as the second law of thermodynamics says. So to keep happy we must strive. And according to buddhism striving is Dukkha.

The third law has nothing to do with nibbana. I thought so too first but after reconcideration it appears that the third law implies the exact opposite of Nibbana.

It says that there is no escape from the system. But we buddhists 'know' that there is. That is what Nibbana is. So the only conclusion I can draw is that the third law is lacking in some way.

Live long and prosper.
/Victor

Victorious · April 2012

...or maybe rather, to which I am loath to admit, that my understanding of the third law and of nibbana is lacking in some way...

DairyLama · April 2012

Hi friend, I ask this mostly motivated by curiosity but do you know some modern scientific facts that the Buddha seems already to knew 2500 years before?
.

I think the Buddha was a great scientist.

DairyLama · April 2012

The third law has nothing to do with nibbana. I thought so too first but after reconcideration it appears that the third law implies the exact opposite of Nibbana.
/Victor

The 3rd Noble Truth just says there is a way out of dukkha.

David · April 2012

...or maybe rather, to which I am loath to admit, that my understanding of the third law and of nibbana is lacking in some way...

We do have to remember that zero is just a construct. There is no evidence of a universal entropy even as non-permanence is universal. Black holes where light is swallowed are thought to power quasars where light emerges.

As far as we know, we are still gaining momentum.

There is no such thing as "nothing" and there could never have been. "Nothing" implies no potential for change.

We have yet to witness a state of zero energy because whenever we try to create a vacuum, something appears from what appears to be "nothing".

Zero Kalvin could change if it goes lower.

My understanding could very well be flawed as well, mind you, lol.

Victorious · April 2012

The third law has nothing to do with nibbana. I thought so too first but after reconcideration it appears that the third law implies the exact opposite of Nibbana.
/Victor
The 3rd Noble Truth just says there is a way out of dukkha.

I am not at all surprised that you took it to mean that.
It goes to show where your mind is at @porpoise!

But I was refferring to the third law of Thermodynamics not the third Noble Thruth.

/Victor

EDIT: Or was it me who understood that the wrong way?

Victorious · April 2012

We have yet to witness a state of zero energy because whenever we try to create a vacuum, something appears from what appears to be "nothing".

That was very interesting and not entirely surprising! Do you have a source or reference please?

There was a theory on the creation of the world that was based on an hypothesis like this.

/Victor

David · April 2012

We have yet to witness a state of zero energy because whenever we try to create a vacuum, something appears from what appears to be "nothing".

That was very interesting and not entirely surprising! Do you have a source or reference please?

There was a theory on the creation of the world that was based on an hypothesis like this.

/Victor

I'll try to find one but the Tao of Physics and the Dancing Wu Li Masters got me looking into it long ago. Feynman diagrams within a vacuum (or the attempts at a vacuum) show "virtual particles" with very short lifespans but there is never none of them.

What this means is that empty space is not "nothing" as it has it's own properties. This is a crude metaphore but it's like saying an empty cup has "nothing" in it when it is full of porcelain. The cup is empty which makes it useful but because it is empty does not mean we can rightly call it "nothing".

What we are doing when we try to create an empty space eventually pulls energy out of space itself.

http://science.jrank.org/pages/7195/Virtual-Particles.html

Also here because if you flow down, they detail feynman diagrams of particles in a vacuum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_fluctuation#Virtual_particles_in_vacua

There is no thing that is not energy but there is no such thing as "nothing".

David · April 2012

We have yet to witness a state of zero energy because whenever we try to create a vacuum, something appears from what appears to be "nothing".

That was very interesting and not entirely surprising! Do you have a source or reference please?

There was a theory on the creation of the world that was based on an hypothesis like this.

/Victor

Wouldn't a creation myth imply a first cause?

Victorious · April 2012

It wasnt a creation myth but a theory of big bang. I can not remember the specifics.

Thanks for the links.

/Victor

Jeffrey · April 2012

Zero Kelvin can't really be a crystal. It is just useful in calculations.

There is energy in the matter of the crystal and in the electrostatic attractions. If there were truly no energy there would be nothing holding the crystal together like vanderwaals forces. If there is holding something together then there is potential energy in the structure. Thus the zero kelvin crystal would be no particles, no mass, no motion, no potential energy in the system. We cannot possibly conceive of it. I wonder what's the difference between the extreme of entropy which is a soup of everything fallen apart uniformly distributed sea and this inconceivable neither anti-matter or matter?

I think the thermodynamics is just useful to solve problems. I am experiencing de ja vu right now!

Jeffrey · April 2012

I love the discussions we can get into when we know just enough about something to be dangerous.

tmottes · April 2012

When the laws of thermodynamics are brought up... IMHO it is always important to remember that the "laws" are really just our descriptions of behavior. It isn't a guarantee how things function in all instances, nor is it hard and fast like the word "law" implies.

Physics can sometimes "change" when you start looking at the very small and the very large (gravity, size, distance, etc) of a number of theories/laws.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Modern scientific facts that the Buddha knew?

Comments